Dear Dave Thanks for the text listing of your proposals. Here are a few comments:
These ones are existing standard names: surface_net_downward_mass_flux_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_all_land_processes moisture_content_of_soil_layer soil_moisture_content I see that there is already a standard name of surface_downward_water_flux. For consistency, I think the existing standard name should be changed (by alias) to surface_downward_mass_flux_of_water for consistency with your proposal surface_downward_mass_flux_of_water_due_to_crop_irrigation or yours should be changed to surface_downward_water_flux_due_to_crop_irrigation * surface_upward_sensible_heat_flux_due_to_anthropogenic_energy_consumption In the definition you call this "anthropogenic heat flux". That sounds more general. Is it really an upward sensible heat flux specifically - no latent heat flux, for instance? Or do you mean the heat released per unit area and per unit time by anthropogenic energy use, no matter what happens to it? * tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_carbon_due_to_emission_from_anthropogenic_product_pool Is this really carbon and not carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon, like others? What is the difference between this and the existing standard name tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_anthropogenic_emission Actually I don't know what "anthropogenic product pool" means. It isn't a phrase known to Google. Is there an alternative? Consequently I also don't understand this one carbon_mass_flux_into_anthropogenic_product_pools_due_to_land_use_land_cover_change * carbon_mass_flux_into_soil_or_litter_pools_due_to_land_use_land_cover_change I guess this should be ..._due_to_land_use_or_land_cover_change * carbon_mass_flux_direct_to_atmosphere_due_to_land_use_land_cover_change By analogy with several existing names of the form surface_upward_mass_flux_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_X could this one be surface_upward_mass_flux_of_carbon_dioxide_expressed_as_carbon_due_to_land_use_or_land_cover_change * change_over_time_in_area_fraction It is OK for this to be change_over_time but would it be better as a rate i.e. tendency_of_area_fraction for which the canonical unit would be s-1? It could still be expressed as yr-1 so numerically the same. Best wishes Jonathan _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
